Pioneer PD-59 CD Player A Winner & Keeper Selling the Adcom GDA-700 D/A Don't Need It

[EdwardGein]

I don't have problems with anyone not liking any equipment I have per se but more so with people telling me I won't hear improvements in audio sound when I do or not hear improvements in sound quality when they say I should. The Adcom did seem to improve the CD sound of my Harmon Kardon 31 DVD player but it didn't seem to improve the CD sound for the Pioneer PD-59, in fact it seemed to make it worse. In regards to tests, I honestly feel if I have to analyze if something sounds better its not worth me getting because I either hear a difference right away or don't.

[Jim Clark]

In regards to tests, I honestly feel if I have to analyze if something sounds better its not worth me getting because I either hear a difference right away or don't.

And that's the fatal flaw when it comes to trying to convince anyone else if you are correct in even your own impressions. There are so many problems with that system that it's tough to cover them all. As has been stated here so many freaking times that even a slight volume difference is going to be perceived as better, when in fact it was only louder. Of course there's more detail, it's louder and therefore much easier to hear additional detail and superior resolution. Level matching is crucial, without it your impressions are meaningless and the sooner you realize that the better off you'll be. It takes a lot more work and it's hard to do 100% correctly but not even making the effort renders everything else worthless to everyone, yourself included.

Sighted listening tests are equally meaningless. If you know what you're listening to your own particular bias comes into play. If I've learned anything from your posts it's that you have some peculiar biases especially when it comes to optical cables. Problems arise when you present these as fact as you so often do. We haven't even begun to deal with the biggest obstacle, memory retention which is incredibly short when it comes to this kind of thing. Very big oversights on your part, IMO if you're trying to convince yourself or anyone else.

You are correct up to a point. None of us can do a verifiable and repeatable tests that will withstand peer review on scientific method. Given my interests in the hobby, I can live with that. Still, a little effort would make at least some sense, wouldn't it?

Regards,
jc